by Ghassan Kadi
There is a lot of myth about ISIS, its roots, and relationship with America. To unravel the mystery, we need to go back to some basics of human behaviour, more specifically, to basics of human behaviour of psychopaths and sociopaths.
In order to understand the current impasse between ISIS and the USA, and to be able to assess if there is indeed an impasse at all, and more importantly perhaps, to be able to make any plausible predictions about any future moves and interactions between the two sides, it becomes imperative to look at the tumultuous and damning history of the Islamist-American interactions over the last three to four decades or so.
When the Americans forged their relationship with King Abdul-Aziz, the founder of the Al-Saud dynasty in the 1930’s, the deal was primarily of an economically strategic nature; oil for money and different types of security for both. It is arguable as to whether or not the Americans have actually at any time since defended the Saudis militarily, despite two wars on Iraq using Saudi soil. Either way however, religion was not a part of the deal that kept those two very diverse allies together.
Religion did not become a part of the equation until the USSR entered Afghanistan. The legacy of Kissinger’s diplomacy was still fresh in the mind of the then US Foreign Secretary Zbigniew Brzezinski, who overtaken by an delusion of self-grandeur, wanted to out-perform his mentor and conjured up a master plan, a plan that recruits Jihadi Muslim fighters to fight the Soviet Communist “infidels”.
The real-to-life Don Quixote shuttling on an official US-jet instead of a donkey’s back, clearly had no idea at all about the nature and the size of the monster he was about to create. The simple reason behind his deadly mistake is a fact that seems to be still little known in the West today; it wasn’t known then, and it remains unknown and hidden away even now.
What drives recruitments for Jihadist Takfiris is not Western money. What drives recruitments is an ancient archaic misinterpretation of Islam; one that has been around for centuries.
So Brzezinski shuttled between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and possibly Afghanistan in order to bring his plot to fruition. He spoke to Islamist fighters, telling them that “God is on your side” [1] and meant to raise an army of Jihadists. Then the Saudis introduced him to a golden trump, Oussama Bin Laden. Bin Laden was not only prepared to leave the comfort of his opulent family mansions, but he was also prepared to put his money where his mouth was.
America nonetheless provided him and his men with weapons, training and funds to eventually create what became known as Al-Qaeda. With this help, Bin Laden raised an army of Jihadi fundamentalists who homed in from all over the world, driven by the archaic Quranic misinterpretation, to fight the Communist infidels.
A marriage of convenience of this nature was bound to lead to a divorce of convenience.
As America was preparing for Operation Desert Storm in order to oust Saddam out of Kuwait, the Saudi government permitted the USA to put boots on Saudi soil. That rang a huge alarm bell for the highly indoctrinated Bin Laden who could not at all fathom and accept Christian “heretic” boots on holy Islamic soil.
Bin Laden raised his concerns to the Saudi Royals, and they in turn assured him that the Americans would never go to the actual holy land (ie Mecca and Medina in the Western province of Hijaz) and that they would leave as soon as the conflict with Iraq was over.
Bin Laden grew restless as time proved that the Americans were not given the marching orders, and before too long, he fell out of favour with the Saudi Royals and eventually became a persona non grata. This all happened in the early 1990’s, and it didn’t take long after this for Al-Qaeda to start targeting American troops and interests in the region, to become America’s prime enemy and listed on top of the list of terrorist organizations.
Furthermore, the personal wealth of Bin Laden turned into a curse in disguise. It allowed him to turn against his former American partners as he was able to self-finance.
Whether or not September 11 was fully or partly an inside job, and regardless of what happened behind the scenes and television screens, America and Al-Qaeda did fall apart and the two sides fought each other bitterly in Afghanistan and later on in Iraq. Al-Qaeda members were incarcerated and dumped in Guantanamo, and any denial of this is unrealistic.
One of the problems of American foreign policy makers however is that they never learn from previous mistakes. And whilst they try to give the impression that they are the masters of information-intelligence, evidence shows that they have little literal intelligence, ie human-intelligence.
This lack of intelligence, on both counts, at one stage became exemplified to me personally when I was watching some developing news on TV back in 2003. American troops were advancing into Najaf; a Shiite holy city, and their tanks and troops were greeted by cheering Iraqis. In obvious total ignorance of where they were and the significance of the location, the tanks kept advancing towards the Shrine of Imam Ali Bin Abi Taleb; the holiest of all Shiite shrines. The jubilation of the mases turned into anger, and people were suddenly throwing themselves in front of the tanks and troops trying to stop them from advancing, and the Americans clearly had no idea at all what the fuss was all about. This is equivalent to say Chinese troops entering the Vatican not knowing what it stands for.
Such is the ignorance of American foreign policy makers and their disregard of other cultures. They thrive on policies of arrogance and indifference.
It is not surprising therefore to see American foreign policy makers repeating the same mistake to the one they made with Al-Qaeda.
The second time around however, they had to use a different name. Whether fundamentalist Islamist Jihadists call themselves Al-Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS, Al-Nusra, Mujahideen, Wahhabis, Muslim Brothers or any other name, they are in principle identical and driven by the same archaic, yet fundamental and deeply-indoctrinated misinterpretations of the Quran.
As the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” was taking form, very loosely-associated elements were bundled together united only by their hatred to the secular Syria under the presidency of Bashar Al-Assad. The Assad legacy, father and son, made many enemies; all the way from Israel (for supporting and sponsoring Hezbollah), to America (for refusing to accept the Middle East American road map), to the Saudis and other Gulfies (for its strong ties with Iran), to the Islamists (for the crackdown on Islamists in 1982), to Turkey (as Syria’s strength would stand in the way of Erdogan’s Sultanate dreams), and last but not least, all the way to the Lebanese 14th of March Coalition (for accusing Syria of assassinating Rafiq Al-Hariri). Other minor groups also joined in, including some disgruntled army officers and would-be reformists who were unable to see the extent of the conspiracy and genuinely believed that they were having a revolution. Many of those however soon realized their mistake and many officers returned to Syrian Army service.
In a twist of logic, the ultra-right wing Christian “Lebanese Forces” became comrades of Islamist fighters.
The diversity of that infamous cocktail also implied diversity in objectives. The aim was to achieve a swift victory and the Islamists were promised the reins of Syria to be handed to them. The coalition was not prepared for a long war any more than it was prepared to withstand divisions within its ranks.
In mid 2013, and upon realizing the strength of the Syrian Army and the immense popular support President Assad was receiving, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan was searching for a magic panacea. He made a secret visit to Moscow and tried to coerce President Putin into abandoning Syria. The buffoon did not realize that he was talking to an extra-ordinary leader of a different type of superpower than his American masters. He even threatened Putin that he would unleash the Chechen fighters, but went back home empty-handed.
It was then then that Bandar, with the help of Mossad, conjured up the story about the chemical attack in East Ghouta in August 2013 and tried to rally up support to invade Damascus. President Putin foiled that plot and declared Syria a redline.
As a result, America backed down about its decision to invade Syria and settled for the face-saving dealing of Syria’s surrender of it stockpile of chemical weapons. That was the defining moment at which that the Islamists realized that the Americans had let them down again just like they had let down Al-Qaeda before them (ie when they entered Saudi Arabia). The Islamists remained focused on an Islamic State, but they woke up to the realization that this was something that they would have to do themselves; ie without the help of their Saudi and American partners.
That was the breaking point in that infamous evil coalition.
But the Islamists did not have Bin Laden this time to finance them. If they wanted to break loose from the binds of Al-Saud and America, they needed to secure their own financial backbone. They found it in Iraqi oil and bank cash and gold deposits in Mosul, needless to mention an apparently big number of wealthy Muslim benefactors who do not want to reveal their identities.
The biggest failure in this devious plan was again that of none other than Bandar Bin Sultan. He was the one who convinced the Americans that he will be able to hold the Islamists by the horn. Unlike Bin Laden he argued, neither will he turn against the Americans nor will the Jihadists turn against him because they needed his financial support. Bandar did not even stop twice to think that ISIS was going to turn around and generate its own funds and be able to dump him. It is little wonder that Bandar was abandoned and stripped of all his titles, responsibilities and privileges. Not only had he let America down, but also the entire House of Saud.
Once self-supportive, ISIS did not have to listen to anyone any more, and their common interests with their former partners and benefactors widened to the extent that their escalating antagonism turned them into enemies.
The so-called ISIS/ISIL or simply IS (short for Islamic State) is based on the Wahhabi (ie Saudi) version of Islam, but as the schism between it and its Saudi roots deepened, the two parties became at odds and vowed to destroy each other. This is easier said than done for Al-Saud given that perhaps 60-70% of Saudis (according to some estimates) harbour support for ISIS.
On the other hand, America realized the extent of the ISIS monster it created as well as its potential growth, and thus decided to clip its wings. Will the Americans get serious about fighting the monster they helped create? This remains anyone’s guess. Is America still helping ISIS behind the scenes as some argue? Perhaps they are, but this does not change America’s realization of the mistake it made. What is clear now is that they have realized that they have committed a mistake, and mostly, that they were wrong in believing in Bandar’s ability to wield ISIS.
The Americans want to curb the growth of ISIS, but having said that, they do not yet seem serious about eradicating it. As a matter of fact, even if they eradicate the organization and its members, they cannot eradicate the theology that underpins it.
The notable Levantine commentator Sharmine Narwani argues that in its nuclear deal with Iran, America wants to step back from the Levant and focus on Russia and China as well as its ailing economy, leaving the Levantine cleanup for Russian diplomacy and joint Syrian and Iranian efforts [2]. This assessment does not seem far-fetched.
Back to ISIS and the USA.
It is very wrong to assume and believe that ISIS, or any Islamist organization for that matter, is just putty in the hands of America. Islamists may well be criminal fanatic radicals, but they are highly indoctrinated and what they want is simple; they want the whole world to turn into an Islamic State under the law of Sharia.
Psychopaths and sociopaths do not make friends. They regard other humans as assets and use them as tools. This applies to interactions between themselves, for if they have to deal with each other, they also use each other for as long as they need to. The Islamists therefore will use America, just like America uses them, but when their interests diverge, they will declare war on each other, and right now, as a matter of fact since over a year ago or so, ISIS has declared mutiny on its former partners in the Levant.
ISIS is fueled by a misinterpretation of the Holy Quran, and interpretation that is based on giving concepts like “Jihad”, “Fateh” and “Shahada” an overriding military perspective.
“Jihad” is meant to be the struggle of the soul against its inner demons. It was distorted to mean struggle in military combat against non-Muslims.
“Fateh” means revelation, but it was distorted to mean military conquest and coercing other nations to adopt Islam.
“Shahada” means vision (ie of the Lord), but it was also distorted to mean martyrdom in battle and a guarantee to go to heaven [3].
The Holy Quran clearly notes that Islam is vehemently against coercion, and that in the latter days, only a few (Thullah) will be righteous. The Islamist fantasy of Islam ruling the world is in total contradiction of the word of the Holy Quran.
The main problems with those archaic beliefs come from two sides; firstly, they are widely accepted (and therefore the ISIS theology cannot be rebuked by Muslim theologists), and secondly, they have been around for centuries.
So on one hand, rational Muslim scholars who understand the true message of Islam are not in a position to challenge commonly-held beliefs without literally risking their heads, and on the other hand America and its CIA did not invent those belief systems.
Those belief systems have been around before the CIA was established and even long before Columbus laid a foot on American soil.
If anything, members of ISIS and similar organizations look down at the USA and the whole West. They regard it as a debauched culture that they are superior to. They will not take orders from those who do not follow their faith, and this is also a part of their doctrine.
America may be able to switch organizations like ISIS on, but it is incapable of switching them off, and any assumption that ISIS answers to America and fully complies with its commands and directions is extremely inaccurate and uninformed.
More inaccurate is the commonly-held belief in some people that “all is going according to plan” for the USA in as far as its plot against Syria is progressing. This cannot be further from the truth. This is a war that they wanted to win swiftly four years ago, and four years later, their victory is looking less and less likely.
In what follows, we shall look at the strategic impasse that American policies are experiencing in Syria, and why is it that an American-led military solution is unfeasible.
——————————————————————-
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYWx_cFzqro
2. http://mideastshuffle.com/2015/08/11/iran-nuclear-deal-why-empire-blinked-first/
3. http://intibahwakeup.blogspot.com/2014/11/the-moral-dilemma-about-isil-by-ghassan.html
It does not matter whether the American-led military solution is unfeasible; they are carrying it out right now. It is fine for them to say they want a diplomatic “transition”, but they are supporting a campaign of violence and destruction, and at the present time it appears the hawks are in control and they are not going to change that plan. The diplomatic coalition being sought by Russia will have to be a military coalition.
Off topic for a bit, but people always mention ‘hawks’ and ‘doves’… But do the ‘doves’ actually exist, and how long has it been since they have directed US foreign policy? Has it been decades? Because thats what it feels like.
Doves? No, not really. Not anymore. What we have now are either moderate-imperialists (“humanitarian interventionists”) or extreme-imperialists (“neoconservatives”).
In the case of Syria I would classify Obama as a passive dove, and Kerry as a more active dove, although I am not there when the national security officials have there debates, only going off other reports. I believe there are in fact debates over how much diplomacy and how much military action is to be taken. Of course the debate takes place in the context of a criminal aggression against Syria either initiated by the US or done with US connivance and support. I can’t say the criminals have any social conscience so “doves” is a relative term I suppose. The following from Voltaire-net might give more of a picture:
http://www.voltairenet.org/article188577.html
The ‘hawks’ in the USA are the neo-conservatives, ie fascist Zionist Jews and a sprinkling of Sabbat Goy Toys for local colour. They DO NOT want peace in Syria. They want Syria destroyed and broken into fragments, its non-Judaic history expunged (to prepare the way for its eventual seizure as lebensraum in Eretz Yisrael)and as many Syrians exterminated as mitzvot, or religiously sanctioned ‘good deeds’ as possible. As a noted Syrian academic declared thirty or so years ago, Israel is a cancer in the Near East, its fascist and clerico-fascist racist ruling elite insanely aggressive and genocidal, and their ambition, their sacred duty as they see it, remains the Oded Yinon Plan to destroy every state of the region. Syria MUST BE DESTROYED NOW, because then Israel can carpet bomb Lebanon and exterminate the Shia and drive them out, preparatory to the absolutely inevitable attack on Iran, after the Presidential election. And after Iran, Central Asia, Russia and China. Make no mistake about it-these evil monsters are relentlessly aggressive.
David, father of Elijah? Good to see you here. And yes, me thinks U.S. support for Daesh is not as passive as this makes it sound.
Briefly, one point of fact. 1962, North Yemen Civil War.
Operation Hard-surface, US AF bombed in support of Saudis.
I had a good friend who led the air strikes to support the Saudis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Yemen_Civil_War
In the paragraph heading Operation Hard-surface it discuses the US offensive role.
This is a very good summary of the historical development of Islamic terrorism.
The material makes sense of more than 25 years of history. It places the American and Saudi culprits amidst the game plan that is now out of control.
Bandar, especially, is a truly malevolent friend of the Bush family who hustled him and all the Saudi royal family members out of the US following 9-11. The only plane allowed to fly over US that was not a military plane. His role in all this horror is nicely laid out by the author.
Thank you, Ghassan Kadi, for your presentation. I look forward to the following article.
US, Turkey, Britain, soon France, Australia and Israelis (unannounced) are all flying or intend to fly air strikes over Syria without asking permission or coordination with Damascus.
At what point do the Russians and Iranians declared a no-fly zone without permission?
It could be enforced with installation of S 300 or some such system. It doesn’t require fighters flying to clear the skies.
The entire West coalition effort, everyone understands, is aimed at Assad.
If Russia and Iran are to be effective, they must stop the West’s operations.
Canada is on the list too, pretty much a WW2 level of allies. In theory, they are fighting ISIS/IS/ISIL/DAESH/Al Queda, which Iran, Syria and Hezbollah are also allied against. What are these people supermen?
I don’t have a problem with my country (Canada) fighting ISIS/IS/ISIL/DAESH/Al Queda, assuming ISIS/IS/ISIL/DAESH/Al Queda is what we are told it is and fighting them is in fact what Canadian forces are doing. I just have little confidence that that is what is happing.
What are these people supermen? The nazies would not have held out against a collation this strong. Yet the media tells us they are unstoppable.
I feel like the John McCain version, the John Kerry version, and even the Ghassan Kadi and Vladimir Putin version of what is happening in Syria is more BS than truth. The really truth will only come out 40 years from now when once secret files are declassified.
Red Ryder,
Excellent point. Dare we to hope that this is being prepared? Look at this:
I don’t understand this https://twitter.com/ISNJH/status/642042694538260484/photo/1 but http://www.MoonofAlabama.org says this link means Russia announced several air defense drills with live missile launches off the Syrian coast near Tartus.
Hmm. I give any thesis from Ghassan Kadi a lot of weight, although I await further installments to be completely convinced as to US motive. Sharmine Narwani, whom he cites here, also makes a lot of sense, and I found her claim that the US is trying to leave the Levant compelling. This entire perspective on US thinking is ultimately either pretty accurate or pretty mistaken. I do look forward to seeing it shown to be correct.
We’re saying that the US is not substantively in control of ISIS, which is following its own destiny. At the moment, certain fragile alliances may exist with common aims, and certain support arms may continue to operate, but also perhaps the US in its deeper thinking is in a time of doubt.
Perhaps Russia can actually draw the US into a coalition against ISIS, if only because at some point the US cannot be seen to be supporting ISIS – a matter of correct theater.
Ghassan Kadi, thank you for this analysis. I look forward to the forthcoming installments when you can amplify your theme. Saker, I’m overwhelmingly grateful that you bring us these great experts and indigenous views on the Middle East.
Grieved,
“US not substantively in control of ISIS” except for the power to destroy it by cutting the supply line from Turkey. But they don’t want to destroy it. They want to control it & use it:
-to destroy Syria, but w/o harming the Kurds, who are seen as a weapon against Iraq, Syria, Turkey & Iran, each having large Kurdish populations.
-to later direct it into the Caucasus & maybe Ukraine.
What a mess!
Interesting article. I’ll be anticipating the continuation/s.
We Americans are in something approaching complete denial about how truly horrible our nation’s recent impact on the rest of the world has been. We are universally hated, even by those who have their hands out to receive their Danegeld, and the world is undoubtedly shaking its head as it listens to the bile coming out of the mouths of our presidential candidates. Shakespeare observed that the “evil that men do lives after them,” but he had no experience of the United States. We choose to dissimulate regarding the bad choices we make followed up with lies to justify and mitigate our crimes. And still later the evil we do disappears down the memory hole. Literally.
A Refugee Crisis Made in America – Will the U.S. accept responsibility for the humanitarian consequences of Washington-manufactured wars ?
More here:http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/a-refugee-crisis-made-in-america/
Well said, Bavarian. The USA is the greatest force for Evil in history, by far. The Nazis were beginners, a vicious outbreak of murderous fury, but over in six years. The USA has been practising genocide for over 200 years, and its death-lust is only growing more extreme. Not just genocidal wars, directly themselves or through crazed proxies like Daash, al-Sisi, Kagame or the Azov Battalion, but vicious global economic policies that are creating grotesque inequality and poverty.
The US elite decided, when the USSR disappeared, that the time had arrived for their long-held ambition, to rule the entire planet, and dispense death and destruction as suited their pleasure. Their military, their strong suit, only grows and grows, and the apparatus of subversion through the NED and the viciously meddling Western NGOs, has expanded beyond imagining. Every single country and every individual in them must bow down before these self-proclaimed ‘Exceptionals’ or risk death and the destruction of the societies. And at the same time the society of the USA itself is increasingly brutal, unjust, unequal, and as the Trump/Palin et al syndrome shows, ludicrously ignorant and moronic. Without a doubt the sheer rottenness of the wasteland of US ‘society’ cannot persist much longer, but such is the Messianic and narcissistic aggression of these evil lunatics, that the chances of a peaceful transition are nil. The US is innately irredeemable, and transformation to something benign impossible, so we must pray for its peaceful destruction, if humanity is to survive much longer.
Mulga, the US is nothing more than a goy puppet with a zionist arm up its buttt.
Read “The Contgroversy of Zion” by Douglas Reed and you will understand much better why that is so. It is the Zionist scum that are the planets prime problem.
My conception of the Jewish question definitely arises from the truth that the Jewish elite control the West. To argue otherwise is quite ludicrous, but, of course, the question is NEVER raised in polite society, proving the thesis. The basis of this power is the money power accumulated over centuries of usury, particularly when it was a forbidden practise for Christians and Moslems. These leading Jews have long desired a redoubt where they would be safe from retribution when those whose blood they suck rise up, as they always did throughout history. Palestine was handed to them by European racists, with the interests of the millennial population(themselves descended from, amongst others, the Jews who remained in Palestine after the Roman expulsions)treated with typically racist contempt.
The Zionists actively collaborated with the Nazis during WW2 to get young healthy Jews safely moved to Palestine, while sacrificing millions of others. And since they founded their state in massacre and terror during the Nakbah, they have relentlessly moved towards spreading Eretz Yisrael, to eventually stretch from the Nile to the Euphrates, while terrorising, murdering, torturing and assassinating their victims, predominately Palestinians, but also many others, and NEVER honestly seeking peaceful co-existence with people they regard as insects. And, of course, they are the prime movers of the destruction of Sudan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
In this process, despite almost total Western MSM bias towards them, and decades of abuse and vindictive retribution aimed at those repulsed by their barbarity, Israel has steadily grown more reviled by the world’s people. Unfortunately this suits the core Judaic mentality, reinforcing the separatism, xenophobia and supremacism that has been the essence of the religion for 3500 years. The most poisonous Jews, the Netanyahus, Bennetts, Shakeds etc, and the clerico-fascists like Ovadia Yosef and the settler Judaic Taliban revile the goyim, and their ‘International Law’ that they do not recognise, save for PR purposes.
Judaism works as a sort of operating system for a Mafia. There is the same sort of omerta, the forbidding of co-operating with the goy authorities when a Jew is being investigated by crime, and those that do so suffer the same sort of total ostracism that Spinoza experienced. Of course these tendencies, and the nepotism and entryism that explains so much Jewish ‘success’ are practised to varying degrees by different Jews. And Israel itself is a very unequal society, although the Jews are a superior class of citizen to the Israeli Arabs and others,
Unfortunately the continued growth of Israeli aggression, belligerence, political and social control in the West and contempt for the opinion of humanity points the way to catastrophe. A catastrophe like that already suffered by the Iraqis and Syrian, the Gazans and Libyans, that no decent person would wish on anyone. Certainly I’d love to see Satan-yahoo et al banged up for life for crimes against humanity, but the trajectory of Israeli state, elite and Diaspora Fifth Columns behaviour points unerringly to catastrophe, for everybody.
Thulah is many not few. That should be qalil. “Thulatun min al-awalina wa qalilun min al-akhirin.”
The ancient error he refers to is that of the Kharijites.
The US will continue to try to use jihadists as tools because what it wants is disorder and dissolution of the world of Islam. After all, arms and Toyotas are not made in Iraq or Syria, are they. The framentation in question began with the Sykes-Picot agreement. The plan of the US is coincides with the plan of Israel, which wants to rule the Middle East and extend the borders of Israel to those of “Greater Israel,” as per the Oded Yinon plan. The Saudis and the Turks are the “useful idiots” of the US and Israel–that is to say, of the Zionist plan for the Middle East. Megalomaniacs have a relatively short half life, however. The zionists also have their plan for the US, but that is another story. If you think all this sounds rather diabolical, you are right. That is precisely what it is. Read St. Paul: The fight is at root with “invisible powers and principalities,” of which human beings are instruments. The plan works especially well because people today don’t believe in such things. They are blind materialists.
@an ancient archaic misinterpretation of Islam; one that has been around for centuries.
It is unfortunately not a misinterpretation, but the real tenets of Islam as it has been created by its founders. The “misinterpretations” are the “esoteric”, sufi, shia, edulcorations of the injunctions of the founders, utterly denounced and persecuted by the “purists”.
I am afraid that the Zbigs had that aspect in view: creation of a permanent aggressive mass, to be used against the oldest and most hated enemy: the Orthodox Church and therefore Russia (and China).
@Wizoz
Yes, unfortunately that’s what I understood as well. It’s in the Koran so it’s holy and untouchable to be taken literally, according to the purists.
By the way, did anyone else notice that ISIS & USA use the same orange jumpsuits for their captives? (compare prisoner attire of ISIS beheadings with that of prisoners at Guantanamo)
Those ISIS videos where those US and UK captives were decapitated were Rita Katz’s Site intelligence productions. Totally out of line of all other ISIS footage from Iraq and Syria. Also they were the pre US bombing ISIS campaign propaganda piece. And that is usually a total fabrication.
The decapitations weren’t even shown in the video, while ISIS normally didn’t edit their videos to cut out the gruesome scenes.
I respect Mr Khadi’s insight into the nature of the Wahhabi / Takfiri / Salafist beast, but believe he repeatedly under estimates the Machiavellean Malevolence of AngloZio neoColonial hegemons – who have long cultivated and embraced the wahhabi malignancy proxy boots-on-ground into their Triad of Evil – Exceptionalism + Zionism + Wahhabism.
Provide the multiple persona al Baghdadis (Shimon Elliot born in Haifa? – with whom McCain has ‘an intimate relationship’) and MI6 payroll firebrand Chaudery type ‘Imams’ recruiters on London streets.
Repeatedly used them not just in Russia-Afghan war, but in Bosnia, 250 000 reportedly shipped into Libya – deliberately leaving that destroyed nation a bloody mess serving as an arms and ‘jihad’ clearing depot to neoColonisation wars floodgate opened to Africa with ‘Boko Haram’ (another silly Anglo-fied name, sporting the same Texas modified Toyotas and IS gear) paving the way for ‘Divide & Ruin’, sale of indispensable arms and “our security” services.
And will use the most hardened of them under another brand name in Eurasia from Crimea to Xinjiang
So in the narrative that AngloZios have little or no control over their Wahhabi proxy forces, I question:
FUNDING
– Why are the stolen oil sales still flowing via Turkey and reportedly Israel too?
– Are the $ millions of ISIS daily revenue all cash that they cannot be tracked, blocked and those paying be prosecuted?
– EU lifted sanctions off Syria purely to buy the stolen oil. Has this been stopped? I don’t believe so.
– US whistleblower Scott Bennett was jailed for finding al CIAda Swiss banks accounts. His testimony is that in the same jail was a Swiss banker who came to US to hand over info on 1000’s of identified accounts being used by al CIAda-IS.
So what real steps have been taken to stop the funding of these proxy force terrorists?
None apparently.
ARMS & LOGISTICS SUPPORT
– Why is Gen Allen gouging out a ‘safe zone’ with Erdogan bombing Kurds if not to keep a supply passage open when that border was near closed ?
– Why do we read admission that SAS are to be found behind those gloves and masks of IS … No doubt other AngloZio varietals too directing and providing specialised skills.
– So many ‘accidental’ dropping arms to IS, leading Iraqis into ambush, standing down as convoys of ‘invisible’ Toyotas cross open desert in this fake ‘Anglos fighting IS’.
Sure, they may bomb here and there – ‘protecting our security interests’, but directing overall cantonising operations nonetheless.
SAUDI
If Saudi Salman and princes are so concerned about al Queda / IS – WHY are they bombing and starving Yemen Houthis in a Gaza style atrocity – but supporting al Queda there?
So with respect to Mr Khadi, Machiavellean AngloAmerica LOVE bloody “quagmires”. They even sabotage peace talks to keep their arms and quagmires going
Dee, I found the article to be excellent, but also had some of the same questions you raised. Perhaps part two will answer some of them.
Great post Dee. I made a very similar comment but I think yours is more eloquent. There are some basic questions that no one in the media is asking, and now even the alt media doesn’t seem to be asking.
Dear Mr. Kadi ,
Excellent paper ! Thanks .
Mikel
Thank you for the article. I will read it thoroughly later.
A bit of news. The rouge state apparently has incurred into Syria again with air strikes against the army:
http://www.sputniknews.com/middleeast/20150910/1026822667.html
Lawless.
I have now had a chance to read your article and look forward to Part 2 before making further comment as it may contain answers to some of my questions.
Rgds,
Veritas
Well, it may be true that the IS “will not take orders from those who do not follow their faith,” but they did take the humvees and various military hardware left by the infidels.
This actually opens up a serious question. Did they, or did they not, intentionally take the bait? Somehow, for all of this to have been done unintentionally seems far-fetched.
Are the IS fighters really so archaic in their thinking to not know that if they take any technology from the enemy, that they themselves will be put into danger?
“the Saudi government permitted the USA to put boots on Saudi soil. That rang a huge alarm bell for the highly indoctrinated Bin Laden”
Did Osama feel this genuinely? Who was he trying to kid? USAF was in Dhahran right through from WW2 onto 1958 and further. Osama as a toddler would have seen US airmen in uniform and their wives going around in Dhahran where he lived. Osama is just as hypocritical an Islamist as Zbig is a hypocritical democrat. The entire jihadi concoction is about power grab under an theological garb.
A good article, I look forward to the continuation.
Larchmonter445′ s reference to the yemen civil war in the 1960s- a war in which those currently called Houthis supported the ‘royalists’ who the Saudi government sponsored- is important.
Behind the Saudi support then, of those fighting Yemen’s Nasserite government, were as Larchmonter points out the US government.
But the real support came from British ‘mercenaries’ ( often actually serving members of the military).
The employment of wahhabi fanatics to fight socialist, nationalist Nasserite and other threats to imperialism, was an old British strategy, not one invented by either Kissinger or Brzezinski, inherited, as most middle east policies were, from the Raj in India.
In fact then not only does the US not learn from its mistakes in the middle east but it has never really developed its own policies for the region. Even its zionism is nothing more than a cartoon version of British policy. Unlike the British, however, the US has no sense of its declining power and the consequent necessity to act subtly or look beyond the immediate future.
If it did it would see that Assad has been and would be quite ready to co-operate with imperialism, just as Iran has shown itself extremely accommodating in its recent negotiations.
The real problem is that the US has allowed its policies to be dictated to it not simply by zionists but by fascist revisionist zionists who, in true fascist fashion, long for death and destruction rather than the accomplishment of their goals- their aim is not regional hegemony but armageddon.
In that they are a perfect match with the wahhabis.
Excellent article. Written by someone who seems to clearly know what he is talking about. Looking forward to part 2 already.
Interesting, but no mention of al-Ciada being used in Kosovo or Chechnya or Kashmir. Yes, Islam yearned to rule the planet long before the remaining continents were “found.” Now two extremist forces want Full Spectrum Dominance of our planet.
Thanks Ghassan Kadi, this is one of the better backgrounders to ISIS/IS/DAESH/ISIL/Al Queda out there.
Your main thesis appears to be that it was thought that the new ISIS/IS/DAESH/ISIL/Al Queda would not go rogue, since they were dependent
“Bandar did not even stop twice to think that ISIS was going to turn around and generate its own funds and be able to dump him.”
The first problem I have with this thesis is who does ISIS/IS//ISIL/Al Queda sell their oil to, space aliens? Moving vast amounts of valuable oil requires vast amounts of logistics and infrastructure, not to mention a willing buyer. Likewise they are not trading this pirate oil for copper pennies, the funds need to be moved through the world financial system.
If the US is truly using all of its resources to stop ISIS/IS/DAESH/ISIL/Al Queda then clearly that would include cutting of their financial resources. Tanker trunks full of oil make easy air strike targets, as do pipelines. Likewise the movement of these funds through the world financial system would not go unnoticed. Additionally the buyers could be pressured, punished for doing business with ISIS/IS//ISIL/Al Queda. As it stands at this moment there seems to be more trade sanctions on Iran and Russia than there is on ISIS/IS//ISIL/Al Queda.
My last point is prior to the Bush II invasion, Iraq was very much a secular country, I understand Syria likewise was very secular. How is that these people all of sudden adapt a radical religious view in just a few years?
Great post CHRIS !
We are supposed to believe that the US has such power over Erdogan of Turkey that he cd be ordered to cancel Turkstream, but not enough to prevent Erdogan’s son from brokering ISIS stolen oil all over Europe. That said, that US cd eradicate ISIS by cutting the supply line is pretty obvious & probably Ghassan Kadi agrees w us. I think the point is that US can’t CONTROL (Guide) them– to attack Assad’s forces except for the Kurds. To leave Syria for the Caucasus when that decision is taken, etc.
Your question about the sudden success of religious extremism: Kadi’s comment that this thread has been w/in Islam for centuries surprised me. I had read that it had been devised by a particular cleric whom the CIA empowered w finances, set up in the Madrasas schools, etc. Whatever the origin this murderous extremism can’t have been prominent; witness the intermarriage and the peacefulness prior to a few years ago.
I personally see the empowerment of “Islamic” extremism as indubitably a function of money. Before salaries and armaments were provided these armies didn’t either. Take a moderately religious guy living in a country where there is insufficient economic oppty, or where he’s a failure. He can’t marry, start a family; he’s viewed w contempt. Offer him a salary now, fill his head w the ideal that he’s doing what Allah wants, and may later get more rewards in power & money. There is in all of us a desire to dedicate ourselves to something greater than ourselves, and I think it highly likely that the new recruit has little idea of the falsity of it all. Consider the power of human psychology to justify one’s own behavior.
Once he’s in, he’s subject to execution if he shows the ‘disloyalty’ of wanting out, so perhaps can’t even allow this to enter consciousness. The trauma of the battlefield and witnessing beheadings I suppose wd reinforce obedience to the military structure. None of the jihadist groups have been as effective a fighting force as Assad’s Arab Army who fight for the reality of their families and homeland.
We are shown a few jihadist monsters on our media, but we know nothing of their common soldiers– absolutely nothing. Remember that our own US soldiers realizing the crime of their actions in Iraq cd find no way out of the military structure– except suicide. We actually lost more men to suicide than killed by war, and many more again who suicided after going home, still unable to live w what they had done.
Chris, have you seen Cartalucci’s latest http://journal-neo.org/2015/09/08/us-seeks-occupation-as-us-fighters-flood-syria/ ? He speaks of the “Western elements” of the jihadists and of the Brookings strategy for Syria’s takedown. He confirms that sometimes those silly masks hide Westerners.
Thanks again for your comment. It’s reassuring to me to see that your voice is out there. I hope you are also posting on less friendly sites. Pity not to duplicate your comment in a few more places. It’s just the sort of thing to make the still sleeping doubt their illusions.
Regards,
Penelope
It wasnt a failure from the point of view of the sociopath hegemons to create an enemy. They want permanent conflict and arrested development everywhere. This because healthy societies become competitors and limits the hegemonic profits. But in addition facilitates the march towards world government dominated by the western financial oligarchy.
Addition to my previous comment.
I meant say that the creation of an enemy in addition facilitates the march towards world government dominated by the western financial oligarchy.
(It inadvertently appeared as if I connected that march with healthy societies)
You are absolutely on the dot, Peter! In fact, the Brits created Pakistan by dividing India in 1947, mainly to block any natural relationship economically of India with the Mid-East. A crucial part of Pakistan is NorthWest Frontier Province (NWFP) now known as Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa. This was the most heavily Muslim province in undivided India, with 95% population as Muslim. The provincial Govt was of the Indian National Congress (INC), led there by Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, “Frontier Gandhi”. Gandhi said the bravest fighters for non-violence were these people in NWFP.Mountbatten as Viceroy of India had to deal with demands for Punjab and Bengal provinces to be given in entirety to the proposed Pakistan on the spurious basis that they had respectively, a 55% and 65% Muslim majority. This was, of course, a no go, as Pakistan was demanded on the “two-nation theory” , on behalf of a 27% overall Muslim minority in Undivided India, and you could’nt simultaneously demand that a 45 % and a 35% HIndu minority in those two provinces would be compelled to join Pakistan. Mountbatten struck a deal with Nehru and Patel, who were authorised to negotiate on behalf of INC. No one can be as cunning as an anglo-saxon, especially one who was a cousin of royalty like Mountbatten was. Mounty proposed that the elected Provincial assembly members in Punjab and Bengal would vote separatelly from the groupings of Hindu-majority and Muslim-majority districts as to whether to go for division of their provinces or not. INC issued a whip and the votes favoured partition.
But in NWFP, Mounty did not agree to the Assembly deciding. Had he agreed, whole of NWFP would have been part of India.Borders for India with Iran and Afghanistan would have been there. In any case, support for partition among Muslims, even in Punjab was marginal, with no indication of where the borders would lie, and thus a totally uninformed public. In Sind, even in the election that the Brits rigged in 1946, only 46% voted for the Muslim League which advocated partition. In Bengal, the Muslim League had a Provincial Govt in 1946, but with the support of European members nominated by the British Governor.Pakistan would have collapsed as a concept if NWFP Provincil Assembly had been allowed to decide the matter the way the Punjab and Bengal assemblies did.
Effectively, Nehru and Patel threw NWFP under the bus, and in exchange, Mounty agreed to a modality to partition Punjab and Bengal, with Hindu-majority areas going to India,. We got the agreement that enabled our independence, only because our Muslim compatriots in NWFP voted with us!
The driving force for the British was precisely to block any normal economic integration of India with the oil-rich Mideast. Had India remained one in 1947, the coup in 1953 in Iran would not have been allowed. (It was entirely a British thuggery, as the oil firms tht Mossadegh nationalised were British, not American. Jinnah in pakistan allowed the British intelligence to operate from across the Iranian border , from Pakistan. Nevertheless, President Truman throughout his term refused permission for the coup. Even when Eisenhower (Ike)replaced Truman as President, he permitted the coup with scepticism, saying “the proposed plot reads like a dime novel”)
Today, Saudis sell oil to India and China for dollars which they then invest in Us govt securities. No fertile backward and forward linkages here. Not even for Gaza, does a penny go.
It is a very ggod paper. I will make 2 comments.
1) IS is not a real country with an industrial infrastructure, a banking system, a military school. Even having looted Irak and Syria (oïl and bank’s deposits) they must have accomplices to buy their oïl and provide them with weapons, logistics to support their army and men able to define the strategy and condutc the operations. Why when it is easy for the US and EU to apply sanctions against Russia and Iran, they are able to do the same to IS’s accomplices ?
2) If the Muslim scholars are failing to develop rationale to fight the crazy ideas of IS, why others men are not trying to initiate discussions on some issues such as: What is looking like the God those people are worshiping, what are his attributes, what kind of relations they want to establish with God. From IS’s behavior that God is a monster, it is a human’s creation with its worst instincts. It looks like most of the IS’ s people have been educated in schools paid by Saudi Arabia, why not getting rid of that awful monarchy
Although I liked it overall, I would point to one limitation in this article, in my view: The repeated emphasis on the motivational force of points of Islamic doctrine neglects the actual experience of oppression as a motivator.
I mean, you can have a doctrine hanging around that calls for lots of military action, but unless your real circumstances make that seem like a good idea the doctrine is not going to gain traction. There was Catholic doctrine that called for killing off anyone who deviated from the tenets of the Universal Church (as they saw it). And back in the day, they applied it a lot. Plenty heretics got burned, there was the Albigensian Crusade where they massacred French towns because many of the townspeople had a different idea about Christianity. And we’re not talking about how religious prejudice might have had some impact on these things–religion was the direct, official cause; if you asked the crusaders or the Inquisition why they were doing this stuff, they would tell you that it was about religious doctrine and the fear that if this kind of thing spread, lots of people would go to Hell instead of being saved. But these days, that doesn’t happen much. Nobody cares nearly as much about the doctrines involved, there’s far too many Protestants for killing them all to be practical, the Catholic church has much less power, there’s Muslims to be bigoted against who are much more “other” than Protestants, and so on. Closest we’ve gotten lately was the Protestant/Catholic fighting in Northern Ireland. But it didn’t spread to Protestant and Catholic populations in England or America. It was caused by the social conditions in Northern Ireland, the oppression of the Catholics by the English-in-origin Protestants. The old doctrines and interpretations are still available should anyone want to pick them up, but nobody bothers because they have no social or political function.
Coming back to the Middle East, it’s a violent place where many people are poor, displaced, desperate, victims of injustice and so on. The governments are dysfunctional and often evil, and they are hand in glove with foreigners who invade and oppress. There’s plenty reasons to fight. An interpretation of Islam that says we gotta fight and the power of Allah will help us win has an obvious political function. There are other kinds of social tools that enraged people who want to fight might have taken up. In the mid-20th century leftist, class-oriented ideology was one, as well as secular pan-Arab nationalism. Secular pan-Arab nationalism didn’t work out, and leftism simply lost, as both the imperialist powers and the local elites worked very hard to eliminate it. Islam was pretty much the remaining avenue for doing politics, and in a situation filled with violence, violent Islam was bound to have appeal.
Currently ISIS are arguably trying to take over the mantle of pan-Arab nationalism (just not secular this time), while the only significant group I would consider leftist in their approach to injustice in the Middle East are the Kurds of Turkey and Syria (not Iraq so much, most of them are a different political formation). Violent ideologies are going to be strong in the region until some stability and reduction in injustice can be reached, and the ideology used for that violence will be some interpretation of Islam unless some more compelling ideology gains strength. But I would not say an interpretation of Islam is driving the violence; people are using it because it answers their immediate need, which is to strike back. Unfortunately for them, violent Islam directs struggle in a direction which, even if it wins, generally seems to just make people’s lives worse–makes injustice harsher, authority even more arbitrary and so on. This is why even when a situation is intolerable, when you fight back it’s so important to have a good idea what you want instead, how you’re going to make things better, rather than just assuming that if you get rid of the bad something good will somehow fill the void.
Often Obama and certain segments of the military (joint chiefs under Dempsey) seem to prefer a more prudent course than the complete recklessness of the hawks. I’m unsure whether there is real factional infighting or if this is simply a good-cop/bad-cop routine to confuse the opposition.
It’s entirely possible that Obama invited the Russians to play a bigger role in taking down ISIS, then signalled the sincerity of his wish to eradicate ISIS by announcing the withdrawal of the patriot missiles on the Turkish border. Imm’y the other two NATO countries w patriots on Turkish border announced their withdrawal too. Then increased Russian aid & support to Syria is met by hyperventilating media.
Factional infighting or deception? Two contradictory policies pursued simultaneously to see which one works? (When Dempsey was sacked as head of joint chiefs the rumor was that he had requested his orders in writing because he found them so contradictory)
Meyssan says Obama’s faction wants to get out of middle-east, leaving a now co-opted (nonrevolutionary) Iran in charge of at least Syria & Iraq. Under this premise Saudis & & Israel control the rest w the United Arab Army under the command of Israel (which is what’s happening now in Yemen).
Obviously when/if US retires most of its attention from the middle-east, it will be in support of its opposition to Russia & China.
Salam Dearest Ghassan,
I have lots of respect for your writings, but the worst thing one can do is to underestimate “The Opponent”.
Underestimate The Opponent, who supposedly cannot tell the difference between Shia and Sunni. What Kaka (Sh*t).
When the Ottoman Empire of Turkey was divided into many, many nations, at that time a new religion called Wahhabism was created by our Masters (The Brits) which was based on ibn Taymiyyah and who turn was highly influenced by the House of abu Sufyan (Kharijites).
A cancer was recreated in Islam by The Opponent, at that time both Kissinger and Brzezinski were even conceived yet let alone that they created this monster. So please, don’t spout The Empire mantra that The Opponent cannot tell the different between Shia and Sunni. Double Kaka.
9/11 changed everything. The monster, the cancer within Islam created by our Brit Masters, now become a tool for the Zionists. Thus, the monster become a threat for The Empire, especially in UK in the mosques and so forth.
So everyone beside Israel is in cahoots to get rid of this monster, this cancer within The Humanity. The Empire, Russia, Iran, House of Saud are all in cahoots. If The Empire wanted Assad to be gone, he would be long gone and Putin would have not been able to do anything about it. As Obama rightly said that Russia is a Regional Power and not a Super Power any more. The Empire itself is now propping up both Russia and China so to have a Proper Balance of Power in The World.
There is no longer real wars in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen and so forth. Just like ISIS, these wars are figments of imagination. Imagine, ISIS to pump, load, sell and get about $ 1 million worth in currency in a day, what kind of logistics would it require. What Kaka.
Only Netanyahu is isolated, he is history and he knows it. If you live in Middle East, you will understand that sectarian is out of window, that the Shia and Sunni are being united again. Wahhabism is a failed doctrine, and needs to change it Kharijites ways.
That doesn’t mean it is the end of Kharijites. Until Judgement Day, The House of Prophet Mohammad (saws) will survive, and with it the House of abu Sufyan (Kharijites) will be there in opposition, as The Tribe will never rest.
Best regards,
Mohamed (a Shia from Oman)
The “Empire” (i.e. America) is propping up nations like Russia in order to maintain a balance of power in the world!?!
What disinformation.
If you believe this, I have some Wall Street stock advice I want to sell you … straight from Bernie Madoff and Ken Lay.
Balance of power is the last thing that America wants. The United States lusts to acquire more and more power for itself alone. Indeed, America’s military doctrine of Full Spectrum Dominance openly evidences this ambition, as it calls for American dominance of land, air, sea, outer space and syber space. Truly, it is an example of America’s mad power lust.
If anything, these Muslim propagandists are desperate to diguise the fact that it is Islam–especially Sunni Islam–that is not only in cahoots with the American Empire (and Zionists) but are actively being armed and financed by the Anglo American Zionists, even as they murder their fellow Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc.
Hence, the American Axis is aggressively arming and backing Sunni Muslims to attack other Muslim nations such as with its backing of Al-Queda and now the Islamic State terrorists against Iraq, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, and elsewhere!
Here is an eye-opening article that exposes the sinister role of Islam in helping to bring up about the globalist New World Order. As it states, Islamicism is a very useful geopolitical weapon to destabilize nations and weaken their national soveriegnty–turning them into failed states embroiled in idiotic religious sectarian and benighted Islamic backwardness.
The Globalists and the Islamists:
Fomenting the “Clash of Civilizations” for a New World Order
http://www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/BritIslam.htm
http://www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/MB.htm
Do you consider The Empire to be so ignorant?
Don’t ever underestimate your opponent!
Have you considered they were just trying to test the resolve of the Shia?
Best regards,
Mohamed
Hi,
based on this excellent essay I have redacted a German version with lots of more references at:
DER STELLVERTRETER-KRIEG IN SYRIEN, TEIL 2 …
FS3
I just wanted to correct you in one thing. It is going as planned for the Americans.
WWII left America with a huge military-industrial complex and army. More than that these militarized elements within society came to leading positions during the WWII. The same thing had happened in Soviet Union.
Since the threat was gone, WWII was over the hige Army and all following industrial complexes should had been shuted down. But in both America and Soviet union they survived as they found each other as perfect enemy to fight against, to keep its people in fear and thus have a urgent need for huge military conflict.
This was not made on purpose, but was normal behaviour for those people who just had woned WWII.
After the Cold War was over and Soviet economy collapsed and Union along it the Americans lost that perfect enemy. The Red tide was no more. No more hidden communists, communist terroist organizations, revolutions etc.
There was again no longer need for such huge sums of money to be spent every year on Army and more of super advanced weaponry and systems.
The Americans tried a little bit playing a world cop but soon found an perfect enemy.
It was the Terrorists. Al-Quaeda. As such it is irrelevant. It is a mean to have a purpose for the Army and its military-industrial complex.
Anyone can be a terrorist. He can be in your school. Your church. Your favourte bar. On the street. Anywhere. It can be your neighbour. Your college. Anyone. And ofcourse you, American citizien want your children protected. Safe.
How? Well everyone needs to be traces, spied on and controled. Terrorists allow goverments to spy upon its own citiziens. Any citizien can be proclaimed to be a terrorist. Western secret services are slowly becoming like Gestapo and NKVD. But baby steps are needed, so people wouldnt stand again.
So first thing Americans got from Terrorists is a reason to increase control of their own population.
Second thing, was that hostile countries could be invaded on the claims of supporting and organizing Terrorists
Your Bob doesnt wants Terrorists blowing themselves up in Texas in schools. Its whole a lot better to bomb the shit out of them in Afghanistan. Bob looks TV. Bob will trust to what ever he sees there.
But we have now a change. Terrorists are only partialy good for the purpose they have served. They arent a true civilizational enemy like Communists or Nazis were.
So we have two options side by side going
First is the evil Russians again. Especialy usable in Eastern Europe. But again only partialy. Russians simply arent globaly so strong to form a sigle super threat like the Soviets were before.
Second we see more of is Islam as an idelology
Islamism. Where evil Russians arent enough, Islamism will help out.
Whats the real key here? Simple. To insure peace in USA. To stop a class revolution and civil war over there. To ensure thar those who are rich remain on top. To remain biggest crocodile in the lake with biggest shrare of the fish.
And ofcourse alll of that time pretending to be superior moral force. Indirect force is always better than boots on the ground.
Very well concluded. It was info that I already knew but I still appreciate your effort to put it in “print” or ok – online atleast.
It is always nice to see that others are well-informed aswell.
The result of all this is that I emigrated from Sweden to Switzerland 13 years ago and my sister did the same but to Australia. In my oppinion the only 2 good oasis left. Sorry to say.
Best regards and keep up the good work
Marcus